Frank commentary from an unretired call girl

Scrupleless in Seattle

This is ridiculous; this cost a lot of money and is tomfoolery. – Don O’Neill

Once again, so-called “liberal” Seattle has demonstrated its deep conservatism, prudishness, hypocrisy and dishonesty by setting up an elaborate entrapment scheme intended to humiliate the clients of sex workers, deprive us of income and produce a severe chilling effect on the market. Sara Jean Green, who should know better than to believe the anti-whore garbage vomited out by cops, told it this way [with a few corrections from me] in the deeply-prohibitionist Seattle Times:

…members of the Seattle Police Department’s Vice…Unit arrested 204 men during the 10-day operation that began July 5, netting more than $22,000 in cash…“We never anticipated this volume,” [lied] Sgt. Tom Umporowicz [about]…the police-operated Euro Spa, the first sting operation of its kind in the city. He estimated court fines from the operation — $2,733 for a first-time offender, with repeat offenders paying more — will total at least $550,000. Formerly known as Bamboo Spa, the business was shut down in May by Umporowicz and his squad…Umporowicz’s [scam artists] posted ads for Euro Spa on backpage.com…For the “average john,” hiring an escort “is a crapshoot … because you don’t know who is going to show up at the door,” Umporowicz said. Picking up a woman on Aurora Avenue North is also risky since “you could easily get … ripped off and you’re more visible to law enforcement…Most of these guys going to massage parlors think they’re fairly safe”…In many of the vice unit’s earlier stings, men were arrested then released, later receiving summonses in the mail. But [politicians declared]…that…there should be mandatory jail bookings for men arrested for sexual exploitation. It’s the relatively new name adopted by the City Attorney’s Office for the misdemeanor crime of what used to be known as patronizing a prostitute. The hope is that the experience of changing into orange jail garb, being photographed and fingerprinted, and undergoing the jail’s process of verifying names, addresses and phone numbers will serve as a future deterrent…[one] veteran [sleazy sow is referred to]…as “the vice queen.” Dressed in a tight tank top, a short skirt and four-inch heels, the [sociopath is expert]…in making men comfortable [in order] to [destroy their lives]…“Some guys won’t even hand me the money — they throw it on the bed or they throw it on the floor,” she said. “It’s degrading…They would never treat their wives or girlfriends or someone they were trying to pick up in a bar like that.”

As usual, the pigs grunt and oink a lot of filthy lies in order to rationalize that their robbery scam is somehow justifiable, and that it serves some constructive purpose other than pleasing busybodies, getting votes for amoral politicians and letting pervert cops (like the sociopathic policewoman described at the end) get their jollies in a massive nonconsensual public humiliation scene. The lies are so thick and obvious here I’m sure most of y’all can spot them; for example, the pretense that the average client doesn’t “know who is going to show up at the door”, when in fact most modern escorts have websites, reviews and an established online presence. And the pretense that not directly handing the sex worker the money is “degrading”, when in fact most don’t want the money directly handed to them (in the mistaken belief that this will protect them), is especially vile considering that the police and the prohibitionist laws they enforce are the direct cause of this so-called “degradation”. Sorry, amateurs; the truth is our clients generally treat us better than they treat women silly enough to give it to them for free, no matter what sickos who get off on pretending to be whores tell you.

But while the cops boast about their contribution to destroying the fabric of society and fascist media companies obediently parrot the propaganda, the faltering “sin and degradation” narrative has lost considerable popularity and stings like this are recognized for what they are by many other journalists:

…KIRO Radio’s Don O’Neill…noted that the [Seattle police department] is understaffed by more than 340 officers and they are currently being paid tons of overtime to deal with the recent protests related to shootings around the country…That’s why, to him, the sting was a “colossal waste of time…You pick up the phone and call the police and they’re not coming…because we’re using our man- and women-power to do stuff like this.” O’Neill said…it’s…an attack on the lives of tech workers and lonely Seattle residents…“there will be divorces over this, families will be embarrassed and they may end up losing their jobs”…

…Female officers were tarted up in tight clothes and high heels and offered men sexual acts for cash…The sting caught 204 so-called “johns” and netted the department $22,000 in cash. But that’s only the beginning of the city’s profiteering…all the court fines…could total $550,000. And who were these monsters? They ranged from surgeons to a nurse to bus drivers to a journalist…The operation, of course, is presented as a means to protect exploited women…But…there wasn’t even the pretext of trying to catch johns who were looking to hook up with under-aged or trafficked women…in what business on earth does it benefit workers to have their customers arrested? As many sex worker activists have pointed out, depleting the customer pool of men who have the most the lose if they get caught makes sex workers’ lives harder and more dangerous…

And there, as the Bard put it, is the rub; well-established escorts with large client bases aren’t going to be affected by this beyond the usual two- or three-week lull that results every time the cops stage one of their high-profile pogroms. Nor will celebrity whores like me, whom potential clients can verify with a quick Google search. No, it’s going to be the immigrant women and other marginalized sex workers, those who work in massage parlors, on Backpage or on the street, who will suffer the most from this evil game. Sex work isn’t going anywhere, no matter what cops, prosecutors and morally-retarded billionaires want you to believe; it fulfills a very real and important social function and new sex workers and clients enter the demimonde every day. These crusades do nothing but hurt the most vulnerable individuals on both sides of the transaction, just as all prohibition disproportionately harms the most marginalized. One might think that at a time when the public is beginning to awaken to the realities of overpolicing, public officials would have more sense than to approve of these sadistic spectacles; however, that would assume that said officials aren’t echo-chamber-dwelling narcissists. The only way to stop this will be for those who approve of it to suffer actual consequences, and that isn’t going to happen until all of you clients out there get off of your duffs and fight. Regular clients outnumber full-time whores by at least 60 to 1; gentlemen, I suggest you had better rethink your current silence, unless you want to be the next one with your name and picture splashed across newspapers, TV screens and websites.

I agree with all of the above, and would add that my heart goes out most to the children who come from abusive homes and find money in street sex work. We sent our children to Catholic school in another city. The school was great, but the priest was abusing the kids. One of them, who was a friend of my kids, a bright, happy child, who could have stepped out of a Norman Rockwell painting, wound up on the street and later committed suicide. I hold sex work prohibition as culpable as the church for his death.

Decriminalization would allow clients to find adult, consenting, sex workers, and hopefully the county might take the money it is wasting on entrapment and put it toward creating good homes and counseling for these children.

A year ago I attended a talk with the Oregon Attorney General and the lawyers who helped legalize gay marriage in Oregon. One of them made the point that the tide of public opinion turned when they stopped focusing on their rights and focused on how they were couples in love, just like everyone else. I mention this because while both gay rights and sex workers and clients rights are totally valid, it might be good to look at what the best story to tell is in order to sway public opinion. Perhaps pointing out how no prohibition has ever done anything other than drive the activity underground, harm innocents, make criminals rich, and waste huge amounts of tax dollars would resonate with the public. Point out that if you substitute gay, mixed marriage, alcohol, marijuana, etc into the anti sex work rhetoric, it all sounds the same. And it has always resulted in policies we eventually repudiated after much cost and suffering.

Another set of arguments worth looking at are analogous to the medical marijuana arguments. There is a population of people, the old, disabled, and some who need help understanding how to form relationships that all benefit from seeing sex workers, and create a sympathetic image in the public mind.

It might be good to bring up how sex is pervasively monetized in our society. From the boy paying for the first date, to sex used in advertising, to “every kiss begins with Kay” (the diamond ads), valentines day, etc all push the idea that men should bring gifts to get “kissed”. My mother used to say that it is as easy to fall in love with a rich man as a poor man. And she told my daughter once that her virginity was her most important currency. Society takes this “wisdom” so much for granted that no one says much about it. The only way massage parlor sex work is different, other than criminalization, is that the sex is brief and relatively inexpensive.

One class of sex workers who I have trouble feeling empathy for are the trophy wives of the uber rich. If you look at Trump’s “marriages”, it looks exactly like what the prohibitionists are decrying: foreign young women imported to service a coarse wealthy client. I’ll stop accusing the prohibitionist of hypocrisy when they arrest Trump for trafficking.

The ACLU treats the bill of rights like the menu at a restaurant. “I’ll have the free speech, but hold the revenge porn, whatever that means today.” Freedom of association, 2nd Amendment rights, and freedom to make mutually beneficial contracts are not on the ACLU menu.

They may eventually decide to act for sex workers, but almost certainly will never support clients. Too many ACLU donors are married women.

Here is an ACLU position on decriminalization of sex work. At least one state affiliate is actively working on decriminalization. Donations to the ACLU can be anonymous, and membership is not publicized without a member’s consent. One good thing clients can do is donate and note they are doing so to support decriminalization. (But don’t specify the money is earmarked for that as it causes a lot of hassles.) Any donation would be appreciated, but a donation in excess of $1,000 will get their attention.

“”The ACLU supports the decriminalization of prostitution and opposes state regulation of prostitution. The ACLU also condemns the abuse of vagrancy or loitering laws or licensing or regulatory schemes to harass and arrest those who may be engaged in solicitation for prostitution. While there are both male and female prostitutes, laws against prostitution most frequently refer to, or are applied to woman. Despite the statutory stress on female prostitution, the ACLU’s policy is applicable to prostitutes of both sexes….
Such laws have traditionally represented one of the most direct forms of discrimination against women. The woman who engage in prostitution is punished criminally and stigmatized socially while her male customer, either by the explicit design of the statute or through a pattern of discriminatory enforcement is left unscathed.
Prostitution laws are also a violation of the right of individual privacy because they impose penal sanctions for the private sexual conduct of consenting adults. Whether a person chooses to engage in sexual activity for purposes of recreation, or in exchange for something of value, is a matter of individual choice, not for governmental interference. Police use of entrapment techniques to enforce laws against this essentially private activity is reprehensible. Similarly, the use of loitering and vagrancy laws to punish prostitutes for their status or to make arrests on the basis of reputation and appearance, is contrary to civilized notions of due process of law.
Since the ACLU policy is that prostitution should not be made criminal, solicitation for prostitution is entitled to the protection of the First Amendment.
The ACLU reaffirms its policy favoring removal of criminal penalties for prostitution and in support of total sexual freedom among consenting adults in private.”
ACLU Policy 211, 2007″

ST, you need to take a closer look at the ACLU, and learn the difference between protected and unprotected speech. Speech that incites material harm to others is not protected, and the ACLU won’t defend it.

As far as the Second Amendment is concerned, there is no serious threat to it. The NRA spends $250 million a year to defend it while the ACLU has roughly half that to defend all the rest. I’m not sure why you feel it is incumbent on the ACLU to duplicate their more than adequate efforts.

I hope they focus on arresting those that were actually participating in exploiting trafficked women, not those who saw consenting adult escorts.

I’m also curious if writing a review on a web site is a strong enough reason in WA to make an arrest for prostitution… Some were even charged with “promoting” prostitution, which is a felony; should it be “patronizing”, which is a misdemeanor? Did they overcharged?

Regarding the cop’s comment that some of the clients threw the money on the floor: I’ve been seeing a particular sex-worker for a long time, and for many years I was putting the money-envelope on the bureau, but at some point she asked me to start putting it on the floor. So at least one sex-worker prefers the money on the floor. She admits it’s a weird preference.

I’m wondering how furnished the rooms were. If the cops only put beds in the rooms, then the clients would have had only three choices: hand the money to the cop-pretending-to-be-a-sex-worker, put the money on the bed, or put the money on the floor. And since most guys-who-pay-for-sex-on-a-regular-basis think that they’re not supposed to hand the money directly to the sex-worker, they would have thought they had only two choices — the bed or the floor.

Now that I think about it, I remember visiting an incall location many years ago that only had a futon on the floor in the bedroom. I put the money on the floor, not because I wanted to degrade the sex-worker, but because I didn’t see any other place to put it. I think every other incall I’ve been had some other place to put the money — a bureau, or table, or something.

Hello
Are there any organizations or civic groups or lawyers working to stop this police act?
Entrapment of vulnerable groups of people puts fuel on fire for those individuals who are struggling to get a life after years of misfortune and end up ruining innocent families lives
Please share with me any groups active on stopping this corrupt police act!

[…] Scrupleless in Seattle | The Honest Courtesan – Jul 18, 2016 · I agree with all of the above, and would add that my heart goes out most to the children who come from abusive homes and find money in street sex work. […]

Whorish Media

Maggie on Twitter

Boring but necessary legal stuff

All original content on this website (i.e. all of my columns, pages and anything else which I write myself) is protected under international copyright law as of the time it is posted; though you may link to it as you please or quote passages (as long as you attribute the quote to me), please do not reproduce whole columns without my express written permission. In other words, you have to say "pretty please with sugar on top" first, and then wait for me to say "okey-dokey".